This morning on Fox News Sunday during the 2010 predictions, Brit Hume appealed to Tiger Woods to find redemption and forgiveness in Christianity, pointing out that Buddhism doesn't offer what Woods needs to recover as a human being. In a very brief statement, Brit presents the issue as one of objective truth versus false religion, and gets right to the heart of the matter of alienation with others and God and our need for forgiveness and reconciliation. He doesn't present Christianity as a placebo, faith makes us feel better. He offers what Woods needs, what we all need: redemption.
Here is Hume's comment from the transcription:
Tiger Woods will recover as a golfer. Whether he can recover as a person I think is a very open question, and it's a tragic situation with him. I think he's lost his family. It's not clear to me that -- whether he'll be able to have a relationship with his children.
But the Tiger Woods that emerges once the news value dies out of this scandal -- the extent to which he can recover seems to me depends on his faith. He's said to be a Buddhist. I don't think that faith offers the kind of forgiveness and redemption that is offered by the Christian faith.
So my message to Tiger would be, "Tiger, turn your faith -- turn to the Christian faith and you can make a total recovery and be a great example to the world."
That's great. Thanks for posting this.
Posted by: RobertK | January 03, 2010 at 06:27 PM
Hoorah Brit. Those are the kind of remarks that make the Christian heart soar especially when heard on national TV!
Posted by: ed roldan | January 03, 2010 at 07:28 PM
I made the mistake of reading about 30 of the comments on You Tube regarding this segment. The hatred toward Brit's message is palpable, and only matched by the desperate ignorance of basic Christian beliefs. Very discouraging on one hand, but on the other it confirms what the Bible says about the world's response to the Gospel, as well as pointing out the need for apologetic ministries like STR.
Posted by: Noblewar | January 03, 2010 at 09:06 PM
What does Hume mean by redemption? Since he separated it from forgiveness of sins, I am curious what it is.
Posted by: Trey | January 04, 2010 at 06:11 AM
I think only Brit could give you an answer to the question "What does HE mean..."
But there are several notions to consider, all of which are tangent discussions to the main idea that a well-known newsman took the story into a place news stories don't go today. Brit treated Tiger as a real person. The other guy after him (forget his name)was typical insofar that his comment was superficial, distant, and impersonal: Oh-well- another-scandal-sure-glad-it-ain't-me-pass-the-beer-nuts mentality. Fact is, he didn't seem to care. Brit did.
As far redemption / forgiveness. Forgiveness is the ingredient for redemption. Forgiveness is the prerequisite.
One thing to remember is the world promises redemption all the time...it just doesn't forgive. Which means the world's "promise" is a charade...a lie. There is a reason Christ is also called "Deliverer."
Posted by: David Hawkins | January 04, 2010 at 10:40 AM
You Tube commenters are notoriously cruel and bigoted; I would never take what they post seriously, since so much of it exists to arouse anger, and not to enlighten.
I thought what Mr. Hume did was charming and loving at the same time.
The remedy is repentance and redemption, not the elimination of desire (in Buddhist terms).
Posted by: Richard Romano | January 04, 2010 at 01:31 PM
Brit Hume's statement was clear, compassionate, courageous, and Christian. He packed a lot into that sound byte. What a great example of what it means to be an ambassador for Christ in one's vocation. May his tribe increase! Thanks, Melinda, for drawing this to our attention. Great post.
Posted by: Jeff Kimble | January 04, 2010 at 06:12 PM
My wife and I Tivo Special Report and that's the only FOX show we watch regularly. We both thought is was too soon for that puppy Bret Baier to replace the old dog Brit Hume. You can have O'Reilly and Hannity. Brit gave me substance.
Posted by: Paul | January 04, 2010 at 07:53 PM
Thanks Melinda for making mention of it before the rest of the nation picked up on it and they have.Funny thing is the regular audio podcast of Fox News Sunday has yet to be posted.saw it via DVR last night.Miss seeing Brit everyday also.Bret does a good job..
Posted by: Deloy | January 04, 2010 at 11:19 PM
It is interesting you have posted this. I gave you credit for leading me to the story of unearthing Biblical Nazareth. However, I also have a story on this in my que.
I recently left a comment stating I was going to write a piece on Nazareth, so, that get's posted. But, the Tiger Woods, Hume article will be up in the morning. I have a flag on it, so I have to post it. The Nazareth story will be up at 2:30am.
Posted by: Jim Leasure | January 04, 2010 at 11:28 PM
Hume's follow-up comments on the O'Reilly Factor last night were equally profound...if not moreso. They even talked about the ire raised when the name of Jesus Christ is spoken and of the volatility of His name...even though Brit only made mention of "Christianity" in regards to the Woods comment. (Brit reminded us that particular volatility is already made known to us in the Bible. The entire exchange was one of the better TV moments I've seen in recent years.)
Posted by: David Hawkins | January 05, 2010 at 07:59 AM
It always takes courage to say the name of Christ to a world that hates Him...Bravo Britt you spoke for Christ!!
Posted by: Terry | January 05, 2010 at 04:12 PM
I'm curious if Brit or really anyone here really knows "the kind of forgiveness and redemption" that Buddhism "offers". Even Richard's comment on "desire" belies ignorance as it is only one of the three kleshas/"poisons" mentioned in Buddhism, and isn't even the central one in te whole of Buddhist thought (not to mention that it is one of the most one-dimensional translations that we have; not technically incorrect, but certainly not very indiciative of the term's meaning).
What have any of you read about Buddhism? Have any of it been from Buddhist writers or published anytime in the last 20 years (the earliest works on Buddhism are notoriously misguided and often make huge mistakes in explicating Buddhist thought, especially on emptiness/shunyata). Whatever may be said about Brit's comments (and everyone elses back patting in relation to it), such a statement made in ignorance doesn't bode well for the integrity of the person making it.
Posted by: Kevin Winters | January 06, 2010 at 06:53 AM